Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Fire Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears first reading on building-code provisions adding corridor smoke-detector standard
Summary
City planning and fire officials presented a first reading of a municipal-code amendment to adopt a missing general-provisions section and to add fire-code language requiring additional smoke detectors in long corridors of multifamily residential buildings; the matter will return for a second reading in August.
The City of Olivet on Aug. 12 received a first reading of Bill 30‑50, which adds a ‘‘general provisions’’ article to the municipal building regulations and includes new amendments to the 2021 International Fire Code addressing smoke detectors in long residential corridors.
Carlos Trejo, director of planning and community development, said the city adopted the 2021 building codes in June but inadvertently omitted a ‘‘general provisions’’ division. The proposed article consolidates administrative items — hours of construction, permit-fee procedures, escrow/receipt processes and enforcement deposits — without substantive change aside from organization.
Assistant Fire Chief Tim Paine described an amendment aimed at corridors in multifamily residential buildings. Paine said some buildings with long corridors (200–300 feet) currently rely on a single detector near a smoke door; the amendment would require additional corridor detectors in specific circumstances. ‘‘The code is written as 8 feet or wider that it has to be every 30 feet within that corridor,’’ Paine said, and the proposed language would address long narrow corridors that now lack intermediate detectors.
Officials told the council the change is intended to clarify and extend protections already present in some building designs; the staff said buildings already constructed with corridor detectors (including Olive Crossing and Irvington developments) have them in place. Council members asked whether the amendment would require retroactive installation; staff responded that existing buildings with compliant systems are not expected to require retrofits.
Because this was a first reading, no vote was taken; staff said the item is scheduled for a second reading at the council’s next meeting in August.
